vinasp wrote: There is nothing of that sort in the Four Nikaya's.
The suttas contained in the four Nikāyas aren't a comprehensive systematic presentation.
vinasp wrote: Is it an attempt to reconcile the "four stages" with Dependent Origination?
vinasp wrote: Q1. What is meant by the "Learners Liberation"?
[ ie. what stage or stages are meant.]
Stream-entrant, once-returner, & non-returner.
vinasp wrote: So the idea that the items in the DO chain are "designations" comes from Ven.
No, it's been around for at least 2000 years.
vinasp wrote:On another thread you quoted him as follows:
From Ven. Ñāṇananda's The Magic of the Mind, p. 63:
"It would indeed appear strange to us that in Buddhist psychology even contact and feeling – with which we are so intimate – are treated as ‘designations’ (paññatti)."
But is this correct?
To me, passages such as the one being commented on here (MN 18.17), are only
saying that if feeling arises based on contact then because one is aware of it
one can "point it out" or "designate" it. If, due to the absence of contact
feeling does not arise, then there is nothing that can be "pointed out".
According to this interpretation "contact" is also a mere designation. Again, the basis of designations is appearances as they appear to the six senses.
vinasp wrote: It is not saying that feeling when it arises is only a designation.
Perhaps we need to look closely at the Pali here, and enlist the help
of some of our Pali experts.
It's a question of interpretation, not a question of language. If you now prefer a realist interpretation, which requires substantially existent unique particulars, that's your choice. But the paññattimatta interpretation has the advantage of not requiring those ontological commitments while still accepting the appearances of functional things.